That's perfectly logical: power is an aphrodesiac, democracy is placing power in the hands of the people, therefore democracy is the state handing out an aphrodesiac, which is contrary to the one child policy.
My problem with this law is that it implies that VCR recording and CD ripping were illegal to begin with
At time of writing they are illegal, hence the word "legalize" in the headline. Under current Australian copyright law, the only fair use provision allows an excerpt from a work (not an entire copy) to be used strictly for academic purposes.
Basically, this is the Australian federal government telling the people "We can take away your right to do with your property as you please, but we're feeling magnanimous today."
Not quite. Its codifying the way the law is applied in practice, and amending a clause that hasn't seen a revision in over 30 years (well before the need for such exemptions existed...at least, I don't recall anyone complaining about the need to rip music to their iPod back in the late sixties). It compensates for the fact that Australia is not as litigous as the US, nobody has ever been prosecuted for making copies of anything for personal use, which means we have no "timeshifting" case or equivalent to set a precedent. Its actually an example of a government expanding the rights of individuals in accordance with public expectations; its understandable if you find a government being responsive confusing (admittedly, I'm having a bit of trouble accepting this myself).
1: VHS machines are still available in shops; a new piece of equipment is not at the end of its lifetime, just like any format that is still actually in use is not obsolete.
2: Stand-alone DVD recorders are still quite expensive; VHS is still the most common home recording format.
3: TiVo is non-existent here; the hard disk recorders we do have make the DVD recorders look cheap.
4: You're being too literal, in that the fair use principle would apply to all home recording technologies, regardless of the article's headline.
5: The only mention of "VCR" was in the headline, which, if the author of the artice is responsible, was written by someone who is clearly a total fuckwad ("transferbangle"?!? WTF? If there was a literary prize for "article containing most bullshit in a technical publication", this is a sure winner).
Odds are they will change the laws to say that selling or giving away copyrighted material that is not yours to do so is illegal.
This is exactly what Australian copyright law says right now*, and I don't see that changing soon. The idea is to add a fair use clause; considering the US has had such a provision for some time without affecting the profitability of the entertainment industry, I think the Australian entertainment industry will have a hard time supplying plausible arguements against such a change.
This also shouldn't be taken as a surprising initiative from the Australian government (Philip Ruddock has marginally less care and compassion than the average vampire), since part of the Free Trade Agreement with the US was parity of copyright laws; I doubt any possible changes will go beyond that.
*Remembering that currently the right to make and distribute copies rests soley with the creator of a work (or their authorized representatives), but individual copies may be given or bought and sold second-hand perfectly legally.
I'm not going to enter into debate over who's on top...that's really none of my business. But I suspect that 40% is seriously exaggerated; it certainly isn't anywhere near that here, even during the Gay Mardi Gras.
I worked for many years as a musician, so I spent a lot of time in all sorts of bars but the response was fairly consistent. Might have something to do with being a bass player...
20% sounds rather high to me, and I live in Sydney (the homosexual capital of the southern hemisphere), and work in the entertainment industry, the second fruitiest industry in the world (behind fashion).
That said, the women I've talked to in bars over the last few years have all turned out to be lesbians, so either 20% is too low, or...OMFG, I'm a NERD!!!
Since cancer is the result of a failure in the immune system.
100% incorrect. Cancer is an unregulated growth of cells which have mutated either by random chance or due to some external influence (such as radiation), and is not eradicated by the immune system because, genetically speaking, it is as much "you" as healthy cells are; the immune system simply doesn't realize it should be attacking those cells.
To use a computing analogy, anti-virus software will delete viruses wherever they occur; AV software will not delete a corrupt Windows registry because the registry is supposed to be there, even if it is causing problems. As with AV software, the immune system works with a similar, very simple set of rules: dead cells are removed, living cells from other organisms are removed, living cells from the same organism are left alone (and bear in mind, the immune system has to cope with hundreds of different types of properly functioning cells, so adding the condition "cell not doing its proper job" adds enormous complexity, if its even possible considering stem cells have no "proper job" in the first place). Like the corrupt registry, a tumor consists of corrupt cells, and the anti-viral measures are powerless to do anything about these living cells even if they're killing the host, unless the genetic makeup of the cells is so radically mutated that it appears to the immune system to be from a different organism (this is the mechanism behind transplanted organs being rejected, and does actually protect us to a degree by limiting the types and severity of mutations, without the side-effect of our own organs being spontaneously rejected because of immune disorders).
Your attempted debunking would be more effective if it consisted of more than a cliche (taken care of in the methodology of the study, BTW, the people who perform these studies aren't complete idiots), an unsubstantiated assertion based on no tangible epidemiological evidence, and a factual error. Might I suggest you consult an oncologist, or at least Wikipedia? Or am I just responding to a "them experts don't know nuthin'" troll...
real security would become a reality if the system administrator's salary is more than the CEO's, as the CEO is nothing more than a figurehead of a company, with no redeeming talents or education.
That would simply be a more accurate reflection of the day-to-day worth of those positions. But since those with no redeeming talents would simply switch from studying business management to IT (to chase the money), I could see this idea making things worse.
Also, to give you an idea, if you add enough 2x multipliers on a good zoom lens, point it straight at the sun, and look through the viewfinder on an SLR, you will see nothing but black.
Slashdot Mirror
That's perfectly logical: power is an aphrodesiac, democracy is placing power in the hands of the people, therefore democracy is the state handing out an aphrodesiac, which is contrary to the one child policy.
every barrier is meant to be broken..?
No, just the drivers apparently.
Probably overdue - but progress.
Were you referring to the ability to select a drive, or Vista's release schedule?
My problem with this law is that it implies that VCR recording and CD ripping were illegal to begin with
At time of writing they are illegal, hence the word "legalize" in the headline. Under current Australian copyright law, the only fair use provision allows an excerpt from a work (not an entire copy) to be used strictly for academic purposes.
Basically, this is the Australian federal government telling the people "We can take away your right to do with your property as you please, but we're feeling magnanimous today."
Not quite. Its codifying the way the law is applied in practice, and amending a clause that hasn't seen a revision in over 30 years (well before the need for such exemptions existed...at least, I don't recall anyone complaining about the need to rip music to their iPod back in the late sixties). It compensates for the fact that Australia is not as litigous as the US, nobody has ever been prosecuted for making copies of anything for personal use, which means we have no "timeshifting" case or equivalent to set a precedent. Its actually an example of a government expanding the rights of individuals in accordance with public expectations; its understandable if you find a government being responsive confusing (admittedly, I'm having a bit of trouble accepting this myself).
Sorry to remind you, but The Bangles had two* top-ten singles in Australia: "Walk Like an Egyptian", and "Eternal Flame". Dark times, they were...
*There might have been one other single, but I really don't want to work too hard remembering in the fear I might succeed.
To answer from an Australian perspective:
1: VHS machines are still available in shops; a new piece of equipment is not at the end of its lifetime, just like any format that is still actually in use is not obsolete.
2: Stand-alone DVD recorders are still quite expensive; VHS is still the most common home recording format.
3: TiVo is non-existent here; the hard disk recorders we do have make the DVD recorders look cheap.
4: You're being too literal, in that the fair use principle would apply to all home recording technologies, regardless of the article's headline.
5: The only mention of "VCR" was in the headline, which, if the author of the artice is responsible, was written by someone who is clearly a total fuckwad ("transferbangle"?!? WTF? If there was a literary prize for "article containing most bullshit in a technical publication", this is a sure winner).
Actually, I think the word is derived from Australia's favorite band's name, The Bangles...
We prefer bands with names like AC/DC or INXS...much easier to spell!
But he only counts if WMD stands for "Wanker of Massive Dimensions".
How dare you say that about Fosters! Don't you know all their fermenters are thoroughbreds?
Odds are they will change the laws to say that selling or giving away copyrighted material that is not yours to do so is illegal.
This is exactly what Australian copyright law says right now*, and I don't see that changing soon. The idea is to add a fair use clause; considering the US has had such a provision for some time without affecting the profitability of the entertainment industry, I think the Australian entertainment industry will have a hard time supplying plausible arguements against such a change.
This also shouldn't be taken as a surprising initiative from the Australian government (Philip Ruddock has marginally less care and compassion than the average vampire), since part of the Free Trade Agreement with the US was parity of copyright laws; I doubt any possible changes will go beyond that.
*Remembering that currently the right to make and distribute copies rests soley with the creator of a work (or their authorized representatives), but individual copies may be given or bought and sold second-hand perfectly legally.
I'm not going to enter into debate over who's on top...that's really none of my business. But I suspect that 40% is seriously exaggerated; it certainly isn't anywhere near that here, even during the Gay Mardi Gras.
I worked for many years as a musician, so I spent a lot of time in all sorts of bars but the response was fairly consistent. Might have something to do with being a bass player...
as I get older it seems to be that the only remaining women are lesbian women
Actually, women have been telling me they're lesbian since I was in high school. I think I just have this effect on them...
for me to meet a single hetero girl I typically have to dip down into the pre-26 age range...
And the problem there is...?*
*And with that comment, I join the ever swelling ranks of dirty old men.
1 in 5 people are homosexual?
And 5 people in 1 is an orgy.
20% sounds rather high to me, and I live in Sydney (the homosexual capital of the southern hemisphere), and work in the entertainment industry, the second fruitiest industry in the world (behind fashion).
That said, the women I've talked to in bars over the last few years have all turned out to be lesbians, so either 20% is too low, or...OMFG, I'm a NERD!!!
This is the perfect excuse to keep your kids at home
Why would you want one?
Since cancer is the result of a failure in the immune system.
100% incorrect. Cancer is an unregulated growth of cells which have mutated either by random chance or due to some external influence (such as radiation), and is not eradicated by the immune system because, genetically speaking, it is as much "you" as healthy cells are; the immune system simply doesn't realize it should be attacking those cells.
To use a computing analogy, anti-virus software will delete viruses wherever they occur; AV software will not delete a corrupt Windows registry because the registry is supposed to be there, even if it is causing problems. As with AV software, the immune system works with a similar, very simple set of rules: dead cells are removed, living cells from other organisms are removed, living cells from the same organism are left alone (and bear in mind, the immune system has to cope with hundreds of different types of properly functioning cells, so adding the condition "cell not doing its proper job" adds enormous complexity, if its even possible considering stem cells have no "proper job" in the first place). Like the corrupt registry, a tumor consists of corrupt cells, and the anti-viral measures are powerless to do anything about these living cells even if they're killing the host, unless the genetic makeup of the cells is so radically mutated that it appears to the immune system to be from a different organism (this is the mechanism behind transplanted organs being rejected, and does actually protect us to a degree by limiting the types and severity of mutations, without the side-effect of our own organs being spontaneously rejected because of immune disorders).
Your attempted debunking would be more effective if it consisted of more than a cliche (taken care of in the methodology of the study, BTW, the people who perform these studies aren't complete idiots), an unsubstantiated assertion based on no tangible epidemiological evidence, and a factual error. Might I suggest you consult an oncologist, or at least Wikipedia? Or am I just responding to a "them experts don't know nuthin'" troll...
real security would become a reality if the system administrator's salary is more than the CEO's, as the CEO is nothing more than a figurehead of a company, with no redeeming talents or education.
That would simply be a more accurate reflection of the day-to-day worth of those positions. But since those with no redeeming talents would simply switch from studying business management to IT (to chase the money), I could see this idea making things worse.
Also, to give you an idea, if you add enough 2x multipliers on a good zoom lens, point it straight at the sun, and look through the viewfinder on an SLR, you will see nothing but black.
;)
Is that before or after your retinas burn out?
2) search for pr0n
Like this: http://pavouk.comp.cz/hw/atxps.html? If I was an AI that would turn me on and get me hot...
Extroverts have more sex!!
No, they just talk about it more. That doesn't equate to having more...
Perhaps there is a way to educate logged in users about what sarcasm is...
Perhaps there is a way to educate ACs about what the word sarcasm actually means? Oh wait, there is!
Sarcasm: bitter or wounding remark, especially one ironically worded (definition from Oxford English Dictionary).
So no trace of sarcasm in the original post, just stupidity. But then, some people find stupidity funny rather than just irritating...
Perhaps there is a way to prevent Slashdot giving multiple accounts to jerkoffs.
Perhaps there's a way to educate ACs about which number is the User ID and which is the post number.
One of the most conservative states in the Union. Throwing out a conservative nutjob. Think about it.
Thinking...thinking...aah, now I need a cigarette.
What about the other Jack Thompson: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0860233/?fr=c2l0ZT1kZnx 0dD0xfGZiPXV8cG49MHxrdz0xfHE9amFjayB0aG9tcHNvbnxmd D0xfG14PTIwfGxtPTUwMHxjbz0xfGh0bWw9MXxubT0x;fc=1;f t=21;fm=1 ?
I admit I was having difficulty working out why an Australian actor was staging a trial in Alabama...
...for all those super-computer admins who are frightened by command prompts.
And aren't already using Qmaster/X-Grid...